Ah yes, it makes so much sense; Jesus said He 'didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill the law' in order to abolish the law.open heart,
1. Matthew 5:17-19 was the teaching of the law for Jesus was born of a woman made under the law of Moses. He didn't come to abolish the law in his ministry but to fulfill it. The law of Moses was only for a time till the seed should come. This has to be understood in the difference of the law of Moses and the law of Christ.
2. The law was forever for the jews because their culture was totally wrapped up in it. This is why Jews can still be jews culturally but they can not do it for purpose of attaining righteousness or salvation. This is why they are blinded as the nation itself for the most part. 2 Corinthians 3:1-16 explains this with Moses and the veil over his head for one: the children of Israel could not behold what would come concerning the old covenant and its glory passing away. This in no way disses the law of Moses for it was holy and good (Romans 7:12) but the new covenant was built on better promises and had to replace the law of commandments according to the Mosaic ethic and the endless life of the finished work of Christ (Hebrews 8:6-7).
3. The new covenant is not the old covenant reformed. The law of Moses was because of transgression but it was still the law of God and for a specific reason which was when the seed should come. This doesn't mean that Jesus taught the new covenant when he was born or in his ministry but he was the transition between law and grace and had to fulfill the law before he died and then the old testament law would have served its purpose and no longer needed for Christ made a better way through his finished work.
4. Just because there are similarities because of the moral aspect doesn't mean the old covenant is reformed. If you have a will you can change it and have similar, different and things that were exactly the same but they would not be considered the same in totality.
5. There are many things that had to be changed that were major they could not be the same and the ethic and the result of what that ethic and how it made them respond is different and Christ is the more perfect way to attain to salvation and righteous living in everyday life.
6. So, yes Matthew 5:17-19 was in a different age which we were never under that ethic and this is why that Christ didn't say anything about the law being abolished. If he would have taught anything else he would have never gotten anywhere in his ministry to the jews for the leaders would have automatically accused him of false teaching and got rid of him then. Proper context of proper time factors are important to understand the truth of what is being said and why. Jerry kelso
The only thing left to explain is how Jesus prophesied clear until the end of the age but failed to prophesy 6 months ahead that the law was to be annulled?
Upvote
0